North Korea Claims It Has Cure for MERS, Ebola and AIDS

[COKid]

[dragontology]

We don't want the cure, we want treatments, as those are more profitable. Unless the president or some head of state gets sick, then they'll cure it.

 

How many times have you heard that we've cured cancer or it's just around the corner? We've probably cured a lot of things but we're not going to unless it becomes an epidemic, something they need to contain. Or, how about consumer products that are made to fail, eventually? Planned obsolescence. Why isn't there a smartphone that does everything? So you get annoyed with what it doesn't do and in a year or two you buy another one that does the thing you miss. Why does Apple build smartphones with specs 2-3 years behind? Because they can, but also because their OS is more optimized as they make the hardware and the software... and because people will buy out the initial stock, every single time. Doing something perfectly isn't profitable. Doing something mediocre is. Simply the way the world works.

[Son_Of_Dad]

I don't think a bullet to the head qualifies as the type of cure people would seek.

 

That was my first reaction, one shop cure for NK illness is Kimmy shouting "fire!" On the other hand if they have found the cure it should work wonders in a country where starvation is (apparently) rampant...

[GotBored]

It already has a cure for Ebola, but a cure for MERS and AIDS would be impressive.

 

I find it unlikely but if it were the case, it would mean our advanced medical research departments are pretty much useless or as many suspect are only looking to create treatments which don't fully neutralize the illness so they can maintain a profit while keeping people ill rather than doing the right thing and curing the illness which would only be a once-off payment for them.

 

I still don't understand how with billions of tax payer dollars and billions more from donations medical research hasn't made any advancements in AIDS treatments since like the 1980's. MERS is a relatively new outbreak so I wouldn't expect them to have anything for it yet but for other diseases and illnesses I would expect them all to be a distant memory by now.

[Rippleman]

Since the North is all about personal financial gain, if true, you would see Kim exploit this as much as financially possible by selling cures for as much as he can to finance his activities. If you do not see him doing this, then its clear and obvious that it is not true. I am betting on the "not true" part.

[Rippleman]

We don't want the cure, we want treatments, as those are more profitable. Unless the president or some head of state gets sick, then they'll cure it.

 

This is crazy talk. If it's all about financial gain, many billionaire have died (including steve jobs) from cancer.If what you claim is true that its for financial gain, why didn't "1" single person who wanted to become ultimate rich go to steve jobs and over him a cure to save his life if he paid $40 billion for it? It's because there is no cure, there is no conspiracy, there is no secret vale. Hundreds of millions of people would have to be on it, and out of the hundreds of millions of people, hundreds of thousands have cancer and you are suggesting they are keeping the cure from friends, family and loved ones? Puff Puff Pass.

[Dotdot]

I still don't understand how with billions of tax payer dollars and billions more from donations medical research hasn't made any advancements in AIDS treatments since like the 1980's. 

In the 80`s you were more or less dead with in 10yrs of contracting AIDS. Now you will live more or less a normal life. Maybe 5-10yrs less. That is how it has improved.

HAART (Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy) has contributed to relatively low numbers of people in the UK dying from AIDS-related illnesses in recent years. In 2012, around 490 HIV-infected people died, compared to 1,723 in 1995, when antiretroviral treatment for HIV was not widely available. http://www.avert.org/hiv-aids-uk.htm#footnote9_tkkbsem"' title="HPA (2012, July)

[T3X4S]

We don't want the cure, we want treatments, as those are more profitable. Unless the president or some head of state gets sick, then they'll cure it.

 

How many times have you heard that we've cured cancer or it's just around the corner? We've probably cured a lot of things but we're not going to unless it becomes an epidemic, something they need to contain. Or, how about consumer products that are made to fail, eventually? Planned obsolescence. Why isn't there a smartphone that does everything? So you get annoyed with what it doesn't do and in a year or two you buy another one that does the thing you miss. Why does Apple build smartphones with specs 2-3 years behind? Because they can, but also because their OS is more optimized as they make the hardware and the software... and because people will buy out the initial stock, every single time. Doing something perfectly isn't profitable. Doing something mediocre is. Simply the way the world works.

Planned obsolescence is indeed a profitable  business plan.  Holding back is normal business practice in many industries.  To not throw out your best hand in the beginning; you show a decent hand, then trickle improvements down the line - auto makers do this all the time - its brings longevity, multiple market entries, and consumer choice.  You are right though, it is the way the world works -

 

 

It already has a cure for Ebola, but a cure for MERS and AIDS would be impressive.

 

I find it unlikely but if it were the case, it would mean our advanced medical research departments are pretty much useless or as many suspect are only looking to create treatments which don't fully neutralize the illness so they can maintain a profit while keeping people ill rather than doing the right thing and curing the illness which would only be a once-off payment for them.

 

I still don't understand how with billions of tax payer dollars and billions more from donations medical research hasn't made any advancements in AIDS treatments since like the 1980's. MERS is a relatively new outbreak so I wouldn't expect them to have anything for it yet but for other diseases and illnesses I would expect them all to be a distant memory by now.

Who knows what North Korea has?  I imagine they dont have anything the rest of the world doesnt have, I think the better question is, "do they have the things the rest of the world has ?" 

As far as your comments about HIV/AIDS - rethink that.  Magic Johnson is still alive and healthy.  In the beginning, HIV was a definite death sentence.  Now, the medication is so good, once a person begins taking the meds, they eventually will show negative for HIV.  Pharmaceuticals is a hugely profitable industry.  One would think that if they were sitting on a proven wonder drug that will wipe out cancer, Alzheimer's, MS, or CF - they would release it, and rake in the billions - its what they do - I dont see why they would hold on to something so valuable.

I dont think people would keep a huge secret like that - someone would leak it.

[GotBored]

Planned obsolescence is indeed a profitable  business plan.  Holding back is normal business practice in many industries.  To not throw out your best hand in the beginning; you show a decent hand, then trickle improvements down the line - auto makers do this all the time - its brings longevity, multiple market entries, and consumer choice.  You are right though, it is the way the world works -

 

 

Who knows what North Korea has?  I imagine they dont have anything the rest of the world doesnt have, I think the better question is, "do they have the things the rest of the world has ?" 

As far as your comments about HIV/AIDS - rethink that.  Magic Johnson is still alive and healthy.  In the beginning, HIV was a definite death sentence.  Now, the medication is so good, once a person begins taking the meds, they eventually will show negative for HIV.  Pharmaceuticals is a hugely profitable industry.  One would think that if they were sitting on a proven wonder drug that will wipe out cancer, Alzheimer's, MS, or CF - they would release it, and rake in the billions - its what they do - I dont see why they would hold on to something so valuable.

I dont think people would keep a huge secret like that - someone would leak it.

 

From my understanding HIV is still a death sentence and I've never heard of this long term treatment which cures it.

 

Say someone pays $20 a week to buy their medication for whatever illness they have and they live for about 40 years with that illness before they pass away. That is $41,600 dollars spent on medication.. Now say they found a quick fix cure how much do you think they would charge for it? less than a hundred? a few hundred maybe? No chance they would try charge anywhere near $41,600 for it, so treating something is a lot more profitable than completely curing them.

 

Medical researchers and medical research companies also get paid to do research and to find a cure, what happens once they do? They are finished and no one is going to continue funding them for something that has already been found. They may partly own the patent for the cure but that would belong to the top level executives of the company and not the low level researchers.

 

There are many reasons to keep something like that a secret and people have come out and said they used to work for pharmaceuticals and tried to leak info which suggest they are holding back on cures but these always get debunked and the company just denies everything.

 

I'm not saying it happens, I just wouldn't be surprised if it did. I just find the lack of progress odd.

[Rippleman]

From my understanding HIV is still a death sentence and I've never heard of this long term treatment which cures it.

 

Say someone pays $20 a week to buy their medication for whatever illness they have and they live for about 40 years with that illness before they pass away. That is $41,600 dollars spent on medication.. Now say they found a quick fix cure how much do you think they would charge for it? less than a hundred? a few hundred maybe? No chance they would try charge anywhere near $41,600 for it, so treating something is a lot more profitable than completely curing them.

 

Medical researchers and medical research companies also get paid to do research and to find a cure, what happens once they do? They are finished and no one is going to continue funding them for something that has already been found. They may partly own the patent for the cure but that would belong to the top level executives of the company and not the low level researchers.

 

There are many reasons to keep something like that a secret and people have come out and said they used to work for pharmaceuticals and tried to leak info which suggest they are holding back on cures but these always get debunked and the company just denies everything.

 

I'm not saying it happens, I just wouldn't be surprised if it did. I just find the lack of progress odd.

so why not be the savior of humanity and correct the wrongs of all the people in pharmacy and chemistry? Why would you let the hundreds of millions of people involved in research get away with this? They must be so evil to have a cure and let hundreds of millions of people (including their colleges, friends, family, loved ones, children etc) die all to protect their secret? Oh the horror of it. But... isn't it odd how researchers still die from the very thing you know they have a cure for? Now that's what i call "taking their secret to the grave" to a whole new level.

 

 

/s

[T3X4S]

From my understanding HIV is still a death sentence and I've never heard of this long term treatment which cures it.

 

Say someone pays $20 a week to buy their medication for whatever illness they have and they live for about 40 years with that illness before they pass away. That is $41,600 dollars spent on medication.. Now say they found a quick fix cure how much do you think they would charge for it? less than a hundred? a few hundred maybe? No chance they would try charge anywhere near $41,600 for it, so treating something is a lot more profitable than completely curing them.

 

Medical researchers and medical research companies also get paid to do research and to find a cure, what happens once they do? They are finished and no one is going to continue funding them for something that has already been found. They may partly own the patent for the cure but that would belong to the top level executives of the company and not the low level researchers.

 

There are many reasons to keep something like that a secret and people have come out and said they used to work for pharmaceuticals and tried to leak info which suggest they are holding back on cures but these always get debunked and the company just denies everything.

 

I'm not saying it happens, I just wouldn't be surprised if it did. I just find the lack of progress odd.

 It is no longer a death sentence, hasnt been in a long time.  I never said it cures it - I said it brings your T count so low, that you "actually test as negative".

I appreciate the little caveat at the end of your post.

That is not how most medical research works.  If you make a huge find - you get funding for whatever you want on your next research project - you dont sit in an office thinking of what to do.

As far as something species changing - that I can not answer.  Dont know anyone who has done that.

I certainly understand your math analysis - 

I never said HIV/AIDS was cured, I said the meds are very very good, and it hasnt been a death sentence for 15 years. 

Who knows how much the meds cost though ...

 

[dragontology]

This is crazy talk. If it's all about financial gain, many billionaire have died (including steve jobs) from cancer.If what you claim is true that its for financial gain, why didn't "1" single person who wanted to become ultimate rich go to steve jobs and over him a cure to save his life if he paid $40 billion for it? It's because there is no cure, there is no conspiracy, there is no secret vale. Hundreds of millions of people would have to be on it, and out of the hundreds of millions of people, hundreds of thousands have cancer and you are suggesting they are keeping the cure from friends, family and loved ones? Puff Puff Pass.

Nice little attempt at a burn at the end. I don't take drugs. Not judging those who do, it just isn't for me. Try again.

 

Steve Jobs didn't want a cure. Way I heard it, he thought he could manage the cancer, live with it. He was a bit of a megalomaniac. Would he have paid $40 billion to cure his cancer? He might have, he might not have. And was it his money or Apple, Inc.'s money?

 

But that's the thing. I've never heard of general availability of a cancer drug. What I have heard of is gains being made, tests on mice looking good, things like that. But we've been at that stage for ages. And I think it's a lot of false hope.

 

Look at the bigger picture. Would you want to cure cancer? What if we had no diseases? No animals hunt us. Only viruses. If we eliminate those, our population goes way up. Fewer resources to go around. How close to space travel and exoplanet colonization do you really think we are? If we don't get there before too long, we won't get there at all because we'll choke this planet out before we can leave it. What we really need to do right now is find three Earth-like planets and send two billion people to each of them. We're about at our limit on this one. We're probably way over it.

 

But I'm sure I must sound crazy. You'll probably die before global warming and overpopulation adversely affects YOU, but that depends on where in the world you live.

[FloatingFatMan]

The "cure for cancer" is a fallacy. Cancer is not one single disease and doesn't have one single cure.  There are many forms of cancer which -are- curable today, thanks to continued research into it, and there are forms of it which cannot be cured.  In time, they will be cured too, and when that happens, new forms will likely turn up.

 

It's like playing whackamole on level 9, blindfolded and with one hand tied behind your back.

[Son_Of_Dad]

It already has a cure for Ebola, but a cure for MERS and AIDS would be impressive.

 

From the OP "North Korea shut out foreign tourists for half a year with some of the world's strictest Ebola controls, even though no cases of the disease were reported anywhere near the country, before lifting the restrictions earlier this year." They would need samples and to run testing to have a cure.